1 - 10 Next
A better understanding of math and statistics would help. They get those numbers by taking all the earnings of women in a certain job, then dividing by the number or women. Then they do the same for the men. When ONE woman has a baby that lowers the average for the women. When one woman takes time off to raise a baby, that's time spent not earning raises, etc. This again lowers the average for the women side.
Absolutely! When will Maddow learn she has ho right to speak when some man is interrupting her? You'd think she would have gotten the point when the conservatard turned up the volume. That stupid Maddow has to refuse to be shouted down by somebody's misdirection.
Dr. Sowell has made an error in reasoning and he most likely knows it. The fact is that women earn less than men and no other evidence conservatives provide erase that fact. The argument Sowell and Alex C were making is more rightly that we shouldn't be doing anything about it. It is valid for them to argue that there are good reasons men appear to make more than women. It it not valid for them to deny the truth. Furthermore, the government could never equalize the earnings of men and women unless they require women to be paid for having babies. THEN it would be statistically possible.
Statistically speaking, the facts are predictable. Imagine you had two groups. Group A and Group B. Group A is going to take several years off during the course of their careers. Group B is not. By the end of their careers what would you expect their total earnings to show? Hint: look for Group B to have made more money. Statistically speaking, as long as women are the ones who have babies, they will earn less than men and the only way to change that would be to pay them for having babies.
Maddow "condescends"? The host asks her a question, Castellano rudely interrupts her with his deflections to rationalize away the facts. But those rationalizations don't change the FACTS. You've got to hand it to Castellano, it worked. Tiny brained conservatards are easily confused.
RockinHead wrote - Further, Castellano was specific--once marriage is taken out of the equation, single women are not only as successful as men, but perhaps even more so. That's probably because they're more focused on work. It would be more revealing to see how they compare with single men. All this ignores some basic biology as well--men have testerone, and that makes us more aggressive, on average. Castellano was specific in his deflection. Once he overlooks the facts, he tries to EXCUSE them with his rationalizations to explain why it's okay. But that does not change the facts, and the facts are that women make less than men for doing the same work.
He has a PhD in deflection. Sowell tries to rationalize away the difference in pay with deflections and rationalizations. This easily confuses the conservatards.
Don't confuse ignorance with laziness. You're accused of laziness. But it's pretty evident you're clueless how people actually EARN money. Eventually, even you must realize that if the people around you have no money, YOU won't have any money. You cannot earn money from people who don't have any. And every dollar you've ever earned came from other people.
You mean like all the facts and information that you provided?
Ultimately everything is made possible by consumers spending money.
1 - 10 Next